Waterboarding is torture

[Doodad]

"They," being a loosely affiliated set of factions whose goal is to demonize the west and America in particular. Some do it unwittingly; most do not.

I do not. US foreign policy needs no demonising. It speaks for itself...

The Muppet Show - Surfin' USA

Agreed, but you must have noticed how most of the anti-torture posts focus on the west exclusively. It appears they are not against torture as a whole but torture by the west solely.

[antiaristo]

.


To the extent that the focus SHOULD be on the West, who else is trying to play games with the meaning of the word "torture".

Who else is heaping cognitive dissonance on the free world?

Remember the formation "WMD"?

Remember how "WMD" was moulded, to meet the needs of the day?

The very same is now being done to the word "torture".

THAT danger dwarfs all others.

It's not PUTIN doing that.

[Seamus OBlimey]

but you must have noticed how most of the anti-torture posts focus on the west exclusively

No. I've been reading torture reports for at least five years and only recently am I seeing "It's only waterboarding."

It's not.

[professorpan]

Just the West?

Of course not.

But since I live in a Western country, that's where my focus lies. One can oppose torture everywhere, yet focus on stopping it here.

[Doodad]

.


To the extent that the focus SHOULD be on the West, who else is trying to play games with the meaning of the word "torture".

Who else is heaping cognitive dissonance on the free world?

Remember the formation "WMD"?

Remember how "WMD" was moulded, to meet the needs of the day?

The very same is now being done to the word "torture".

THAT danger dwarfs all others.

It's not PUTIN doing that.

Heh. So he gets a pass. Well, of course.

[antiaristo]

.




It's not PUTIN doing that.

Heh. So he gets a pass. Well, of course.

Repeat after me.
If their hands are dirty, they are guilty.
If their hands are clean, they are innocent.

Get it?

It's not the same as hosing everyone, then giving some "a pass".

You know. Top down. According to the Party Line.

That's what fascists do.


If they are causing the damage, you should name them.

If they are not doing the damage, you do not.

Simple.
Justice.

Try it sometime.

[antiaristo]

.

From Telexx:

UN Convention Against Torture wrote:

For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

Now here's the REASON fire needs to be aimed at the British in general, and Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth in particular.

Because she created...wait for it...a loophole.

From the European Convention on Human Rights:

ARTICLE 13

Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.

http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html


And her is how Her Majesty has implemented that fine convention:

Human Rights Act 1998

1998 CHAPTER 42

Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

Introduction

1The Convention Rights

(1)In this Act “the Convention rights” means the rights and fundamental freedoms set out in—

(a)Articles 2 to 12 and 14 of the Convention,

(b)Articles 1 to 3 of the First Protocol, and

(c)Articles 1 and 2 of the Sixth Protocol,

as read with Articles 16 to 18 of the Convention.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1998/19980042.htm


Can you see what happened?

They deliberately left out Article 13.

That means there is NO PROTECTION AGAINST THOSE ACTING IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY.

You know. Like those torturers cited in the UN convention against torture.

This allows Her Majesty's minions like Gordon Brown to lecture people like Vladimir Putin from the high moral ground.

Whilst simultaneously doing herself whatever the hell she likes. Because there are no "rights" against those acting in an official capacity.

Is it really so hard for you all to see?

[Doodad]

.




It's not PUTIN doing that.

Heh. So he gets a pass. Well, of course.

Repeat after me.
If their hands are dirty, they are guilty.
If their hands are clean, they are innocent.

Get it?

It's not the same as hosing everyone, then giving some "a pass".

You know. Top down. According to the Party Line.

That's what fascists do.


If they are causing the damage, you should name them.

If they are not doing the damage, you do not.

Simple.
Justice.

Try it sometime.

If you don't think Putin allows torture within the Russian Federation you are blind. Give it up.

[Doodad]

4. You are a total fucking scumbag.

KTHXBYE,

TLXX

[antiaristo]

.

If you don't think Putin allows torture within the Russian Federation you are blind. Give it up.

That's a pretty piss-poor effort at bait and switch, sonny.

Pretty fascist, in fact.

Why don't you give it up?

[blanc]

the focus on the west, in so far as there is one, is because that's where we are and so its part of our responsibility, because its CHANGED here from outlawing torture and being on the moral highground to using torture while still claiming to be on the moral highground, because we used to have organisations and press responses and outrage over acts of torture and now we have excuses and buck passing and calling a spade a landscaping creational assistant.
Letting the argument drift around which grossly barbaric and inhuman treatments are worse, or more like 'real' torture than others, and letting the argument leak away at the edges because maybe torture might be said to work sometimes in certain circumstances, is diluting the only focus possible. Our rights have been taken away, torture is a violation of HUMAN rights, and its admission has stolen those rights from us all.
I usually bang on about RA, which is torture which has been covertly sanctioned for a few decades. That too has eroded our human rights, the rights of all of us, not just those who have suffered directly. We are all diminished by what is done to those who are helpless by the 'great'.

[Doodad]

the focus on the west, in so far as there is one, is because that's where we are and so its part of our responsibility, because its CHANGED here from outlawing torture and being on the moral highground to using torture while still claiming to be on the moral highground, because we used to have organisations and press responses and outrage over acts of torture and now we have excuses and buck passing and calling a spade a landscaping creational assistant.
Letting the argument drift around which grossly barbaric and inhuman treatments are worse, or more like 'real' torture than others, and letting the argument leak away at the edges because maybe torture might be said to work sometimes in certain circumstances, is diluting the only focus possible. Our rights have been taken away, torture is a violation of HUMAN rights, and its admission has stolen those rights from us all.
I usually bang on about RA, which is torture which has been covertly sanctioned for a few decades. That too has eroded our human rights, the rights of all of us, not just those who have suffered directly. We are all diminished by what is done to those who are helpless by the 'great'.

Very cogent post. Thank you for some intellect and civility.

[Telexx]

Cause I don't like liars like you getting away with shit.

Thank you for some intellect and civility.

LOL!!1

KTHXBYE

TLXX

[antiaristo]

.

Cause I don't like liars like you getting away with shit.

Doodad,
Aaah. A tangible accusation.

Your homework assignment:

Demonstrate the lie.
Provide supporting evidence.

(And don't forget to show your workings.)


blanc,
It's about closing the loophole opened by Doodad.

Believing torture "works" is a prerequisite to using torture.

Only fascists torture.

Only fascists believe torture "works".

My position is that torture never works.
I support what Schroeder did to his minister.

There is NO loophole.

[Telexx]

I am totally against torture but in the interest of rationality have to challenge the concept that torture never works. It has, it does and unfortunately it will...

Unfortunately, your challenge is - as per usual - semantically ill-formed:

- In the context that you use the word Torture, it is a process (i.e. a verb) that here is being turned into a thing (a noun).
- When you say it has worked, it does work, and unfortunately it will work, you have failed to specify how it has, does and will work.

Surface structure thinking.

What you can say is (in relation to the topic, which is the use of torture by the West:

- The process of torturing people has worked in protecting Western interests in some cases.
- The process of torturing people who may have had information has failed in protecting Western interests in some cases.
- The process of torturing people has not only failed in protecting Western interests in some cases, but innocent people have been injured or killed.

So whether the "Torture Works" depends on:

a) Your definition of the actions that constitute the torture of people.

b) The ratio between "successful" acts of torturing people, thus protecting Western interests, vs. "unsuccessful" acts of torturing people, which in some cases means the injury or death of innocent people with - and with no gain.

c) The threshold you set for when the amount of "unsuccessful" torture of people becomes large enough, morally, to outweigh the protection granted to Western interests.

Even if one innocent person is subjected to a process of torture then "we" certainly lose our bragging rights about ending torture & rape-rooms; about bringing democracy and freedom; about taking the moral high ground. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that many, many innocent people have ended up in Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo. Subject to the process of torture and for what? When everybody knows that the chaos of war means people are rounded up at random?

At what point, Doodad, does the toll grow too high even for you?
And, frankly, do you really think anyone is even keeping count?

Basically, your argument sucks. Torture does not work for a civilised people; only for fascists.

KTHXBYE

TLXX